Morbius

Posted on March 31, 2022 at 11:57 am

C-

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for some frightening images, intense sequences of violence, and brief Strong language
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Mind and body-altering medication
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended comic-book/fantasy peril and violence, vampires, characters injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	March 31, 2022
Date Released to DVD:	June 13, 2022

More like “Bore”-bius, amirite?

Sorry, couldn’t help it. I don’t know if it was the absence of Marvel MCU mastermind Kevin Feige (this movie comes from Sony, which has the rights to Spider-Man and the characters from his comics) or if they’re just digging down so deep into the MCU to find new IP, I mean new characters to develop and have run out of all the good ones, or both. But whatever the reason, “Morbius,” with Jared Leto is something no superhero movie should ever be — dull. The action scenes are poorly staged and the special effects are awful. Plus, it spends much too much time on the origin story somehow without ever making us connect to the title character.

Leto plays Michael Morbius, an only-in-comics character who is severely disabled and a genius. And, of course, something of a renegade. He is so dazzlingly brilliant that he is the youngest scientist ever to win a Nobel Prize, but such a rapscallion that he waits until he is wearing white tie at the ceremony to tell the King of Sweden he is turning it down. He is in a furious race against time to find a cure for his debilitating genetic disorder. The funding for his rogue lab comes from the childhood friend played as an adult by Matt Smith (“Dr. Who,” “The Crown”). They met in a residential treatment facility run by kind-hearted doctor Emil Nikols (Jared Harris). When they first meet, young Michael dubs the new arrival Milo, though his name is Lucien, to indicate that he is just another in an endless line of young patients who die so quickly it is not worth learning their names. Nevertheless, they become friends and he continues to be known as Milo.

Their shared problem is some blood-related thing, so Morbius comes up with the idea that one way to cure it could be to combine his DNA with the DNA of the only animal that lives solely on blood, the vampire bat. What could go wrong?

This experiment is unethical, illegal, and extremely expensive. So, with Milo footing the bill, Morbius and his beautiful colleague Dr. Martine Bancroft (Adria Arjona) try the DNA mixture out on a cargo ship in international waters. Think of it as his version of a radioactive spider bite except that (1) he does it on purpose and (2) vampire bats have qualities that are generally considered to be problematic, starting with an unquenchable thirst for blood.

So Morbius is an anti-hero, which means we have to have an all-out bad guy so he will be not so bad by comparison. The film expects us, like the FBI agents played by woefully underused Tyrese Gibson and Al Madrigal that the first few murders did not matter because the people killed were not good guys, and it is only when a nice single mom gets all of the blood sucked out of her that we should care about who did it. Michael feels bad about what he did and is a scientist and wants to stop even worse things from happening, so we’re supposed to be on his side. The scientific discovery he should be focusing on is how much crime a white guy in a hoodie can get away with.

Even those who come to superhero movies just for the fights and special effects will be disappointed. The CGI is primarily used to make the faces of the two vampires go back and forth from skeletal to normal, plus some meaningless dust trails that their superpowers somehow manifest. Many scenes have drab lighting that for want of a less vampiric word, sucks the life out of the story. Matt Smith is a brief bright spot but Leto spends most of his time trying to look soulful. He says that despite the poor reviews, he’s committed to a sequel. Please, no MORE-bious.

NOTE: Stay through the credits for extra scenes.

Parents should know that this film has extended comic-book style peril and violence, including vampires, with some graphic and disturbing images. Characters use mind- and body-altering medication and strong language.

Family discussion: Why did Milo/Lucien and Michael respond to the treatment differently? Why did Michael reject the Nobel?

If you like this, try: The Spider-Man movies

Everything Everywhere All at Once

Posted on March 31, 2022 at 10:00 am

A-

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for some violence, sexual material and language
Profanity:	Very strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Vaping marijuana
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended fantasy-style action and peril, characters injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	April 1, 2022
Date Released to DVD:	July 4, 2022

They aren’t kidding about the “Everything” in the title. “Everything Everywhere All at Once” is a wildly imaginative and just plain wild splintered story of metaverses, googly eyes, a weaponized fanny pack, dirty laundry, a big bagel, telepathic rocks, divorce papers, Benihana, a “Ratatouille” remix, the IRS, a dress with doll heads on the sleeves, and, as promised, it is all at once.

Michelle Yeoh finally has a role fully worthy of her as Evelyn, who in this universe is anxious, disappointed, and exhausted. She and her nebbish of a husband, Waymond (former child star Ke Huy Quan of “The Goonies” and “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom”) live above their business, a run-down laundromat. Her father, Gong (James Hong of “Blade Runner”), is visiting and she is planning a party. She worries about pleasing him. She thinks her daughter, Joy (Stephanie Hsu) is directionless. She introduces Joy’s girlfriend to Gong as her friend because she does not want him to know Joy is gay. The laundromat is being audited by a grim IRS bureaucrat named Diedre (an un-glammed Jamie Leigh Curtis, having a blast).

In the midst of Diedre’s questions about their receipts, a Waymond from another universe arrives to tell Evelyn that all of the multiverses are under attack by a villain named Jobu Tupaki and only she, of the thousands of Evelyns throughout the multiverses, can save the day. To do that, she will need to access the memories and skills of her Evelyn counterparts.

This leads to a dazzlingly kaleidoscopic adventure that is genuinely thrilling and often hilarious, sensational martial arts fights in an always-astounding array of settings, with a roller coaster of surprising twists and turns that hold up on repeated viewings. One very funny running joke is the increasingly bizarre and often gross triggers for switching to another universe. The production design is sensational, as observant and witty in the ordinary locations (it is the IRS office of nightmares) and the fantasies. Same with the costumes, especially those worn by Jobu Tupaki. All of it comes with cheeky brio and a surprising amount of heart. Ke Huy Quan is a marvel, both in the action scenes and in his seamless shifts between the different Raymonds. He is always present, committed, and completely clear about which version he is. Yeoh shows us all the Evelyns, separate and integrated, and it is a joy to see her go from drab and bedraggled to knowing and open-hearted. She begins the day saying she cannot hold one more thought in her head. She ends with the thoughts of countless Evelyns. I don’t want to give anything away about Jobu Tupaki, except to say the performance has great wit and charm.

The movie opens by taking us literally through the looking glass into a world of layers, miscommunication, and doubling even before we get to the prismatic multiverse. It ends with a sense of wholeness that makes us feel a little closer to, well, everything.

Parents should know that this movie includes very strong language and constant peril and action-style violence with many characters injured and killed.

Family discussion: What would your multiverse personas be? What unpredictable action would you take to access them? What rejections and disappointments have led you to this moment?

If you like this, try: “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” and other Michelle Yeoh movies

The Lost City

Posted on March 24, 2022 at 5:49 pm

B +

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for violence and some bloody images, suggestive material, partial nudity and language
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Alcohol
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended peril and violence, leeches, chases, explosions, guns, many characters injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	March 25, 2022
Date Released to DVD:	July 25, 2022

Let’s get the obvious question out of the way first thing. Yes, “The Lost City” is a lot like “Romancing the Stone,” the 1984 action/comedy/romance movie starring Kathleen Turner, Michael Douglas, and Danny DeVito. Both movies are opposites-don’t-attract-and-then-do stories about shy, bookish-but-beautiful stay-at-home romance novelists who end up on wild jungle adventures with handsome men who are not entirely heroic. Both feature colorful third leads and bad guys scary enough to make the moments of peril exciting.

And that’s a pretty great combination, isn’t it? Especially with four delectable stars at the top of the game: Oscar-winners Sandra Bullock and Brad Pitt plus Channing Tatum and Daniel Radcliffe. Do not listen to those who say that Bullock does not look like a 57-year-old. She looks like a radiantly gorgeous 57-year-old who is completely believable playing someone 20 years younger opposite a leading man who is in reality 14 years younger.

Bullock plays Loretta Sage, a widow still struggling with grief over the loss of her husband and dissatisfaction at her redirection from unsuccessful scholar of ancient civilizations to very successful author of bodice-ripper novels about a pair of very sexy Indian Jones-style adventuresome anthropologists.

Loretta’s purple prose and knowledge of the details of runes and ruins are just one reason for the books’ popularity. The other reason is the handsome, hunky, Fabio-like cover model, Alan (Tatum). He has the broad shoulders, easy charm and flowing locks the fans love. (When I say “has,” I do not necessarily mean growing from his scalp, more like, in his closet to be applied as needed.) He also has something of a crush on Loretta, though he may be confusing both of them for the characters she imagined.

Loretta, who describes herself as a “sabiosexual” (one who is attracted to intellect), thinks of Alan as a brainless pretty boy. She might be a bit jealous of his effortless appeal. She reluctantly agrees to a joint appearance to promote her new book. It does not go well. And then, as she is leaving, she gets into the wrong car and finds herself seated before a lovely array of cheeses and cold meats and an impeccably dressed billionaire who has the most indispensable of all powerful villains, a British accent. He has a clue to a lost treasure, he wants Loretta to translate it, and he won’t take no for an answer.

And so, Loretta is off to the jungle (it was filmed in the Dominican Republic), and Alan, possibly confusing himself with the hero he portrays, goes off to rescue her, with the help of his meditation teacher, a former Navy SEAL played by Brad Pitt, who is as usual the MVP as he is wherever we are lucky enough to see him. This takes nothing away from Bullock and Tatum, who are enormous fun to watch. They have great chemistry and are clearly having a blast. It’s just that Pitt is even more fun. They all get strong support from the rest of the cast, especially Da’Vine Joy Randolph as Loretta’s publisher/publicist and Patti Harrison as the social media liaison. Directors Aaron Nee and Adam Nee keep things moving so the various plot holes fly by without disrupting the popcorn pleasure of seeing Bullock get over her inhibitions and assumptions, Tatum dance, and Pitt be cool in this highly entertaining story.

NOTE: Stay for a post-credit scene.

Parents should know that this movie has extended peril and action with guns, chases, and explosions, and many characters are injured and killed. A character has to take off his clothes to have leeches removed from his body and we see some nudity. Characters use strong language and drink alcohol.

Family discussion: What do Loretta and Alan have in common? What surprised them about each other? Why does Fairfax only want what is impossible to get?

If you like this, try: “Romancing the Stone”

Uncharted

Posted on February 17, 2022 at 5:28 pm

B +

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for violence/action and language
Profanity:	Strong language, several s-words
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Alcohol, scenes in a bar
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended action/video-game style violence, many characters injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	February 18, 2022
Date Released to DVD:	May 9, 2022

“Uncharted” is most likely exactly as good as you hope it will be, and I say that as someone who hoped it was going to be a chases and stunts movie that was fun to watch. It achieves the primary goal of based-on-a-video-game movies, which is that the non-stunts parts like storyline and character don’t get in the way of the stunts parts, which are the reason we are there. There is just enough story and character to add enough emotion to the stunts to take the place of the engagement we feel when we are controlling part of the game.

It helps a lot that the two characters we are supposed to root for and identify with are played by Mark Wahlberg as Sully and Tom Holland as Nate, who bring their established star quality and connection to the audience to fill out the thinly drawn characters they are playing. Holland really takes over as a full-on action hero, even more than he is able to in the Spider-Man movies because there is no mask; he has to act his way through all of the action scenes and did I mention that the stunts are truly wild?

“Uncharted” begins with a “Fast and Furious”-level action scene that is absolutely bonkers. Huge chained-together cargo bundles are hanging out of a plane and Nate is hanging from one of them by a foot caught in the strap until he isn’t, and falls or jumps from one bundle to the other as bad guys are shooting at him and, yes, a fire-engine red sports car comes driving out of the cargo hold, which, let me remind you, is still in the back of a plane that is in the actual, okay green-screen but it looks actual, sky.

It’s the classic MacGuffin: lost pirate treasure. We don’t need to know anything else. We’re on board. Literally; pirate ships are involved and made to do things their builders could never have anticipated. There are objects that must be retrieved in order to find and access it. And there are people who team up and sometimes un-team up and sometimes fight each other to get it. That’s the storyline.

But mostly, there are some wild stunts, on land, water, and in the air. There are nods to (barely disguising lifts from) Indiana Jones, the “Fast and Furious” and “National Treasure” and “Pirates of the Caribbean” series, but hey, this is a movie where the heroes are thieves, so steal from the best. There are villains, meaning people who also want the treasure and are willing to take more extreme measure to get it. There is something between retaliation and revenge, the oldest of them all: “You killed my brother.”

The little hints of plot, motivation, and character never get in the way of the stunts, which are a hoot.

Parents should know that this movie has a lot of carnage for a PG-13, with video-game-like peril, injuries, and deaths. Many minor characters are killed without blood or consequences. Characters use strong language (many s-words) and drink, with scenes in bars.

Family discussion: How did Sully and Nate decide who they would trust? How did that change? How were their reasons for finding the treasure different?

If you like this, try: The Indiana Jones and “Fast and Furious” and “National Treasure” movies

Moonfall

Posted on February 3, 2022 at 5:30 pm

B-

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for violence, disaster action, strong language, and some drug use
Profanity:	A handfuls of bad words
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Medication and marijuana
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended and intense natural and unnatural disaster, mayhem, floods, earthquakes, looting, guns, suicide, explosions, monster, sacrifice, characters injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	February 4, 2022

If movies had IQs, this one would be in the low double digits; it may even leave the viewer’s IQ a couple of points lower. But, hey, this is a Roland Emmerich end-of-the-world special effects extravaganza and it has tsunamis and looting and nuclear bombs, and chases and explosions and more explosions, so if that’s your jam, by all means go for it.

And you can probably preserve those IQ points by just not paying too much attention to what there is of a plot or to some weird elements like the unnecessary reference to “our friends at SpaceX” and a character wondering “What would Elon do?” There’s an endorsement of religion, perhaps to counter a plot turn that undermines some core beliefs of some faiths. A moment that is supposed to be tender and heartwarming as characters reconcile in the face of mass extermination is awkward and random. And the movie does not seem to know how to make the most of genuine big movie star and brilliant actress Halle Berry, stuck much of the time with exposition, cheering other characters on, and wrinkling her lovely brow to show concern.

This is one of those movies where a “fringe” (other people might use the word “crackpot”) “scientist” (not if your definition includes peer review) is the only person who has figured out that the moon is hollow because it is mechanical, constructed, as in not natural. That is space-obsessed KC Houseman (John Bradley), who has a cat named Fuzz Aldren, an English accent, and a tiny following in conspiracy-minded corners of the internet.

What the actual scientists have begun to figure out, and which KC believes confirms his theories, is that the moon’s orbit is shifting and this is deeply concerning because it moderates our home planet’s wobble on its axis, leading to a relatively stable climate and causes the tides. So if it gets out of whack, even a little, it affects everything on earth, from our days and months to our oceans. And if it gets too much out of whack, it collides with us, causing massive tsunamis and earthquakes and ultimately killing everyone. Furthermore, “city-sized pieces of moon debris” hitting the earth could destroy everything.

In other words, it’s a big deal and someone better figure out a way to stop it. In other other words, this is basically “Don’t Look Up” without the satire. That means that most of the people in any kind of position of power either lie (nice cameo by Donald Sutherland who wisely says his lines and gets out), dither around, throw nuclear missiles at everything or or duck out. Most of the people not in power descend into “everyone for himself” chaos. So only our scrappy little group working outside the system can save the day. They do accept help, though, from techies, scientists, and the military.

That team consists of our fringe “scientist,” and astronauts Jo (Halle Berry) and Brian (Patrick Wilson), one the closest of colleagues but estranged for ten years following a failed mission where their colleague was killed. We go back and forth between their mission to somehow knock the moon back on course and the perils faced by their children trying to get to Colorado, which for some reason has been picked as a safe place. That’s Brian’s college-age son (Charlie Plummer) with his mother, her Lexus-dealer second husband (Michael Pena) and their young daughters and Jo’s young son and his nanny. I did enjoy the Roche limit developments that took advantage of the gravitational changes as the moon approached earth.

The sketchy storyline borrows shamelessly from “Superman,” “Battleship Earth,” and “Contact” without adding anything new. Explosion movies don’t need to be smart but they shouldn’t be this dumb. “Everything we thought we knew about the universe is out the window,” a character says. Maybe they should have thrown this script out of the window at the same time.

Parents should know that this film has end-of-the-world scenes of massive natural and un-natural disasters, guns, suicide, looting, sad deaths including a parent who sacrifices himself to save his child, a handful of bad words, marijuana and medication.

Family discussion: Who would you see if you were interacting with the AI and why?

If you like this, try: “2012,” “Independence Day,” and “The Tomorrow War”